Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think that surely Rayner has to go.

1000 replies

Blankscreen · 29/08/2025 09:33

Well well well.

So now it emerges that Rayner rearranged her property affairs and declared to HMRC that her new flat in Brighton is her main residence and saved £40k on the SDLT bill as a result.

She has then apparently declared to the local councils the complete opposite.

I'm sure slimeball Kier will defend and say it was perfectly legal blah blah blah.

Not to mention she has a grace and favour house funded by tax payers in London as her constituency office is so far away. Yet she 'lives' in Brighton - surely she could just commute that distance like may others do every day.

Surely she has to go.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
29
BusMumsHoliday · 03/09/2025 12:34

HansHolbein · 03/09/2025 12:27

Unless I have the wrong end of the stick, and someone please correct me if so, I cannot believe someone with access to what I presume are the best advisors, has made a mistake such as this.

Surely the advisors would check? Double check? Triple check? They surely know that any fuck ups would be a disaster for their client, and the way they are then perceived by the media/public.

Utter madness.

I have a lawyer friend and part of her practice is professional negligence involving other lawyers. There are lots of cases in which otherwise very good people make bad mistakes, or in which good people make understandable mistakes, that are still potentially negligent (she says she reads things and thinks "there but for the grace of God").

I imagine AR is rightly pissed off at her original solicitors (or they are pissed off at her for not declaring something), but I can absolutely believe this happened.

Janiie · 03/09/2025 12:35

AnneLovesGilbert · 03/09/2025 12:15

People would have far more sympathy with her wobbly bottom lip and half arsed mea culpa if she hadn’t called for the resignation of innumerable people for lesser crimes. She’s a massive hypocrite.

Exactly! Getting all teary eyed and wibbly in the Rigby interview. Just own it! 'yes I was offered a loophole I thought it was fine it turns out it wasn't so I'll resign' should have been what she said. No idea why she kept harping on about her family either it's her colleague's opinions she should be bothered about.

All her previous gurning and 'tory scum' shrieks make her look an absolute hypocrite and rather foolish.

Plantatreetoday · 03/09/2025 12:35

BusMumsHoliday · 03/09/2025 12:28

Trusts are an extremely, extremely complex area of law. It is very possible for even an experienced solicitor to make a mistake here, especially if it was a property solicitor who isn't experienced in trusts and the way they interact with tax.

She may have (wittingly or unwittingly) not disclosed the full details of the situation. She also may have been poorly advised. Her statement to the Guardian allows for both possibilities and may have been worded that way while she considers whether to take action against her sols, or because they've agreed to pay out without admitting liability.

I think this both looks bad for her, and that she's being hounded about it because the right wing media hate a working class women who seems to have got above herself.

Rather than
‘working class women’
i prefer to say
Deputy Prime Minister !

I don’t care what her background is I care that she’s an MP and a hypocrite
Her chances of being the next Labour PM now are zero thank goodness.

Locutus2000 · 03/09/2025 12:35

Formatted transcript from above:

Beth Rigby: Deputy Prime Minister, you’ve been accused of dodging a £40,000 tax bill on your new home on the South coast. You said it was your main home while also claiming your constituency home in Ashton was your main home for other purposes. Do you just want to clear this up? What’s going on?

Angela Rayner: Yeah. First of all, Beth, it’s been quite a distressing time for my family. I have a court order that was in place around confidentiality regarding my son, my family and my divorce proceedings that happened in 2023.
And therefore, I wasn’t able to give a full account of the circumstances of our complex living arrangements. That order was lifted last night. I applied to have the order lifted so that I could give people the information.

In 2020, my son had an award and a trust was set up by the court to deal with his finances as part of that award, with a legal trustee. And in 2023, when me and my husband divorced, the decision was because that home was adapted to support my son, who has lifelong disabilities as a result of that injury that occurred to him, that trust was set up and they decided that they would take on the property so that me and my husband could have a nest in arrangement where we could provide for my child in our family home, which is our family home and remains our family home. So when I’m looking after the children, I go back to the family home. And then when my ex-husband is looking after children, he does. And it was done primarily to support my son with his additional needs and to provide stability for them during the divorce. And that was the arrangement that we put in place.

I then went to purchase, took my life savings, basically out of the property, the 25 per cent that I still owned within the property, took that money out so that I could purchase with a mortgage the place in Hove. And I took, you know, advice, on that. And I relied on that legal advice that I received that said that I was liable to pay the standard stamp duty.

Subsequently to that with all of the media reports that have been coming out, I took expert counsel advice on all of my affairs to ensure that everything was done proper and that expert counsel said that the advice that I received was inaccurate because of the trust. I don’t own the property. That is true. I only own one property that is mortgaged like most people. But because of the nature of the trust that was set up by the court, that I would be liable to pay the additional stamp duty.

As soon as I knew that that was the case, I have alerted and referred myself to the independent adviser on the ministerial code to ensure that they can look transparently at what has happened, and also contacted HMRC to say that, there is additional tax owing on this, and that I’m prepared to pay that and fully comply with the HMRC as well.

Beth Rigby: So the accusations that you didn’t pay no stamp duty on Hove, they’re actually accurate. You didn’t?

Angela Rayner: They are accurate. Yes. They’re accurate in a different sense. I think the accusations were that I set up a trust and I flipped it to try and avoid paying it. But actually the complex area of the trust which the advice that I relied upon didn’t pick that up. The leading tax counsel who has subsequently looked at it has gone into that and said that actually, because of that, it did remain my sole property and the trust wasn’t set up as accusations have been made for me to try and flip...

Beth Rigby: Dodge tax...

Angela Rayner: Dodge tax.

Beth Rigby: So, you weren’t trying to dodge tax?

Angela Rayner: No, the trust was set up by a court to provide for my son after an injury.

Beth Rigby: In your statement, you say I deeply regret the error has been made. I’m committed to resolving the matter, and I have referred myself to the independent adviser on ministerial standards. It’s just two more follow ups for that. Did you consider resigning over this?

Angela Rayner: I’ve been in shock, really, because I thought I’d done everything properly, and I relied on the advice that I received and I’m devastated because I’ve always upheld the rules and always have done. And always felt proud to do that. I feel, you know, that it is devastating for me and the fact that the reason why those confidential clauses were in place was to protect my son, who, through no fault of his own, he’s vulnerable, he’s got this life changing, lifelong conditions and I don’t want him or anything to do with his day to day life, to be subjected to that level of scrutiny because it’s his and my ex-husband that is... It’s Not… it’s not fair on them. Often my family is dragged in because of what my role is and what I do. But I try to uphold the high standards, and that’s why I’ve referred myself so that the independent advice can look at everything.

Beth Rigby: You talked about how hard it was to disclose this. Was there a moment as a mum, not as Angela Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister where you thought I’d rather just quit this than have to actually explain about my son, who I’m trying to protect, did you think about just packing it in rather than having to do this now?

Angela Rayner: I spoke to my family about it. I spoke to my ex-husband, who has been an incredibly supportive person because he knows that all I’ve done is try and support my family and help them.

Beth Rigby: Okay. But you did think about, should I pack it in for the sake of the family, but your family are backing you to come out today and explain this?

Angela Rayner: The number one, the number one priority for me and my ex-husband has always been to support our children and do the best thing for our children.

Beth Rigby: So just to be clear, you’ve... I need to wrap it now because you’ve got to go to Prime Minister’s Questions. But just to be clear, you’ve referred yourself to the standards commissioner. You’ve contacted the tax revenue and said you could be liable for more tax. Presumably you deeply regret this because of potentially the fallout for you? Do you think your position, Angela Rayner on, even though you’ve explained it, do you think it’s sustainable? Do you think you can carry on? Particularly as housing minister?

Angela Rayner: Well, I made a mistake based upon the advice that I relied upon that I received at the time, and a leading expert has now said that advice was wrong. I think hopefully most people can see, if you take, if you rely on advice given to you by lawyers and you follow that process and then you find out that that process is wrong and that advice is wrong, I’m rectifying it at the earliest opportunity. People make mistakes, but I conducted myself in trying to do the right thing, and I hope that people can see that.

Beth Rigby: Okay. So legally, you are referring yourself, but does it pass the sniff test? I guess that’s the question.

Angela Rayner: Well, that will be for the adviser to look at all of the information that I’ve supplied them.

Janiie · 03/09/2025 12:36

Plantatreetoday · 03/09/2025 12:35

Rather than
‘working class women’
i prefer to say
Deputy Prime Minister !

I don’t care what her background is I care that she’s an MP and a hypocrite
Her chances of being the next Labour PM now are zero thank goodness.

There is that bonus true.

Plantatreetoday · 03/09/2025 12:39

Sidebeforeself · 03/09/2025 12:03

Or she’s shifting the blame. We dont know the truth - only she does.

And optics DO matter in politics .

Definately shifting the blame imo. But we’ll wait and see if she sues her advisors. That will tell us the truth of it
When does hell freeze over ?

Locutus2000 · 03/09/2025 12:40

Plantatreetoday · 03/09/2025 12:35

Rather than
‘working class women’
i prefer to say
Deputy Prime Minister !

I don’t care what her background is I care that she’s an MP and a hypocrite
Her chances of being the next Labour PM now are zero thank goodness.

Her chances of being the next Labour PM now are zero thank goodness.

Scandals never stopped Boris Johnson from becoming PM.

EasternStandard · 03/09/2025 12:42

Kipperandarthur · 03/09/2025 12:29

It's just the double standards and the utter hypocrisy. She has been so vocal about others and their tax affairs screaming for their resignations.

Then when it suits she behaves with abandon to reduce her own tax liability as far as possible and is now pleading ignorance of the situation.

Yep. And all the DM sad face stuff now.

Tryingtokeepgoing · 03/09/2025 12:43

Mrsladybirdface · 03/09/2025 12:31

does anyone know how the trust would have had the money to buy her share of it for her to get the cash out of the property?

I’m not sure she needed the cash out of the property. So I didn’t suppose the trust had or needed any money. I imagine she gave her share to the trust for her children and to (legally) shelter it from IHT.

thedramaQueen · 03/09/2025 12:43

SeagullSam2027 · 03/09/2025 12:22

I agree - we have failed to hold Rayner and other members of the Labour party to account time and time again while demanding others act with integrity. This needs to stop now.

Same can be said about politicians from other parties, Reform and the Conservatives have many an MP that get away with unethical behaviour. It’s not unique to one political party as I’m sure you know.

BusMumsHoliday · 03/09/2025 12:43

Mrsladybirdface · 03/09/2025 12:31

does anyone know how the trust would have had the money to buy her share of it for her to get the cash out of the property?

Some trusts can borrow money - depends on the structure of the trust. There are trust mortgages as a specialist product. It's also possibly that money in the trust was used to purchase the share of the property if the trustees deemed that in the best interests of the beneficiary.

twistyizzy · 03/09/2025 12:44

thedramaQueen · 03/09/2025 12:43

Same can be said about politicians from other parties, Reform and the Conservatives have many an MP that get away with unethical behaviour. It’s not unique to one political party as I’m sure you know.

But they don't go around shouting "scum" at fellow MPs.
Or shouting across X about tax avoidance etc.

That's the whole point.

LegoPicnic · 03/09/2025 12:46

I actually have a lot more sympathy for her after reading the transcript. It doesn’t sound to me like she was trying to dodge any tax.

I am a bit confused why she wants a primary residence in Hove when her constituency and family aren’t anywhere near there (and she has a grace and favour place in London so commuting can’t be a concern), but people are strange sometimes.

jbm16 · 03/09/2025 12:47

x2boys · 29/08/2025 09:36

Why does she live in Brighton when her constituency is in Tameside?

Rumour she is in danger losing her current constituency so moving to a safer seat?

Allisnotlost1 · 03/09/2025 12:47

Tryingtokeepgoing · 03/09/2025 11:36

The ‘so what’ is because of the hypocrisy of it. She has been very very vocal about those that use legitimate tools to minimise tax as tax dodgers.

Anyway, so now she’s admitting evading the tax. Which does demonstrate that those of us that actually understand how our tax system works were correct…There was no legal way of using a trust for her children to avoid stamp duty / IHT while continuing to claim a principle residence in the constituency for council tax purposes and having an interest in that property.

On the plus side, it clears up the issue of her council tax, and she’s in the clear on that front :) £2k up, £40k down ;)

Edited

To be fair she hasn’t admitted to tax evasion at all - she’s admitted that the advice she was given was wrong and she wants to rectify it. FWIW I agree that she should be treated as if expect any Tory to be, and she should stand down. But I don’t remember any Tories standing down after making similar decisions.

jbm16 · 03/09/2025 12:50

LegoPicnic · 03/09/2025 12:46

I actually have a lot more sympathy for her after reading the transcript. It doesn’t sound to me like she was trying to dodge any tax.

I am a bit confused why she wants a primary residence in Hove when her constituency and family aren’t anywhere near there (and she has a grace and favour place in London so commuting can’t be a concern), but people are strange sometimes.

I don't have sympathy for any of the politicians, they are all out for their own gain. For someone that constantly goes on about paying fair tax, I find it interesting that she is trying to use a trust to prevent paying...

Why is it always someone else's fault for the wrong advice??

The reason for the move is her current seat is in danger, so looking to move to safer seat in hove...

LegoPicnic · 03/09/2025 12:51

I find it interesting that she is trying to use a trust to prevent paying

The trust is to provide stability for her disabled child, from what she’s said.

EasternStandard · 03/09/2025 12:54

LegoPicnic · 03/09/2025 12:51

I find it interesting that she is trying to use a trust to prevent paying

The trust is to provide stability for her disabled child, from what she’s said.

Not sure this gets her off the hook if there’s tax dodging

Tryingtokeepgoing · 03/09/2025 12:56

Allisnotlost1 · 03/09/2025 12:47

To be fair she hasn’t admitted to tax evasion at all - she’s admitted that the advice she was given was wrong and she wants to rectify it. FWIW I agree that she should be treated as if expect any Tory to be, and she should stand down. But I don’t remember any Tories standing down after making similar decisions.

I guess the question is, was it intentional. She says no. It’s just convenient that the mistakes were in her favour ;)

And, more importantly, if there hadn’t been the level of scrutiny that her position attracts, would the ‘error’ have been identified, and would she still be correcting the position?

Many are keen to castigate the press for investigating the apparent hypocrisy of politicians and to uncover the truth. But when it uncovers this sort of thing, I think it’s to be encouraged. The question is, does HMRC have the skills to pick this up without the press…because while this politician has been held to account, how many other cases slip past them?

thedramaQueen · 03/09/2025 12:59

twistyizzy · 03/09/2025 12:44

But they don't go around shouting "scum" at fellow MPs.
Or shouting across X about tax avoidance etc.

That's the whole point.

Maybe so but they go around ripping people off with the PPE scandal for example. I know which I’m more bothered about.

MarstoMinerva · 03/09/2025 13:00

LegoPicnic · 03/09/2025 12:51

I find it interesting that she is trying to use a trust to prevent paying

The trust is to provide stability for her disabled child, from what she’s said.

The use is irrelevant.

Plantatreetoday · 03/09/2025 13:00

EasternStandard · 03/09/2025 12:54

Not sure this gets her off the hook if there’s tax dodging

Exactly and the responsibility is on her not any advisors she used.
We can’t claim ‘we didn’t know’ so why does she think she can use that excuse
She seems to be remarkably unaware of the law

so it’s £40,000 owing plus the standard Hmrc fine then the 17% interest they charge

Tryingtokeepgoing · 03/09/2025 13:00

Allisnotlost1 · 03/09/2025 12:47

To be fair she hasn’t admitted to tax evasion at all - she’s admitted that the advice she was given was wrong and she wants to rectify it. FWIW I agree that she should be treated as if expect any Tory to be, and she should stand down. But I don’t remember any Tories standing down after making similar decisions.

Nadhim Zahawi resigned when he breached the ministerial code over his tax affairs. I’m sure there have been others! He failed to declare an HMRC investigation, and he made incorrect public statements about it. One could draw some parallels, though I don’t think Rayner is the subject of an HMRC investigation as she’s made a self admission. Whether an investigation follows is a matter for HMRC.

CandidLurker · 03/09/2025 13:02

LegoPicnic · 03/09/2025 12:46

I actually have a lot more sympathy for her after reading the transcript. It doesn’t sound to me like she was trying to dodge any tax.

I am a bit confused why she wants a primary residence in Hove when her constituency and family aren’t anywhere near there (and she has a grace and favour place in London so commuting can’t be a concern), but people are strange sometimes.

I’ve read that her current partner’s and his ex wife and children live in Hove. I do wonder how she’s going to find time to go to a Manchester constituency every weekend but I guess that’s a different problem.

MarstoMinerva · 03/09/2025 13:03

Rayner is bang to rights.

She should do the honourable thing, and step down.

Her colleague, Reeves, is about to embark upon the mother of all tax raids, and they are gearing up for another go at the welfare budget. The optics are shot.

They expect many of us to take it, whilst they behave in a manner which is either incompetent or deceitful.

We are not mugs.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread